• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

— So Police Take Away All His Guns and License to Carry

Wayne Jr

Wayne Jr

bis vincit qui se vincit
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
7,722
Reaction score
1,931
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Man Reports His Pistol Stolen — So Police Take Away All His Guns and License to Carry
By Pluralist | Oct 4, 2019

"A Connecticut man had his pistol permit and firearms seized by authorities after he reported the theft of one of his guns on Monday. Officers responded on Tuesday to a report of car burglary made by Christopher Jerome, 26, the New Haven Register reported. He told police that, believing he would get back into the vehicle shortly, he didn’t lock his car doors after parking on Monday evening. Jerome said the next day he discovered his pistol had been lifted from the car’s unlocked glove box and the driver’s side door was open.

Police arrested Jerome on a reckless endangerment charge.

Under a recently implemented state law, police then entered Jerome’s home and removed the rest of his firearms: a Glock, another handgun and an AR-15.

The new law, which took effect on Oct. 1, prohibits storing a handgun in an unattended motor vehicle if it is not in the trunk, a locked safe or a locked glove box. Authorities also seized his pistol permit, which according to one police official, will likely be revoked. Capt. Richard Conklin told The Register the state believes storing a firearm in a car – even a locked car – is not “a prudent thing to do.” “A car is like a glass box. If you take out any of the windows, it is no longer locked,” Conklin said. He also said small safes shouldn’t be an option either since they can be easily taken out of vehicles.

Jerome has been released after posting a $1,000 bond."

Text of the new law.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, secure your guns or you won't have any guns to worry about anymore. I support this law and would like it to be a Federal regulation. It's one of the few gun control policies I support because it can actually improve safety and doesn't undermine the RKBA.

Queue the hate, it changes nothing.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Man Reports His Pistol Stolen — So Police Take Away All His Guns and License to Carry
By Pluralist | Oct 4, 2019

"A Connecticut man had his pistol permit and firearms seized by authorities after he reported the theft of one of his guns on Monday. Officers responded on Tuesday to a report of car burglary made by Christopher Jerome, 26, the New Haven Register reported. He told police that, believing he would get back into the vehicle shortly, he didn’t lock his car doors after parking on Monday evening. Jerome said the next day he discovered his pistol had been lifted from the car’s unlocked glove box and the driver’s side door was open.

Police arrested Jerome on a reckless endangerment charge.

Under a recently implemented state law, police then entered Jerome’s home and removed the rest of his firearms: a Glock, another handgun and an AR-15.

The new law, which took effect on Oct. 1, prohibits storing a handgun in an unattended motor vehicle if it is not in the trunk, a locked safe or a locked glove box. Authorities also seized his pistol permit, which according to one police official, will likely be revoked. Capt. Richard Conklin told The Register the state believes storing a firearm in a car – even a locked car – is not “a prudent thing to do.” “A car is like a glass box. If you take out any of the windows, it is no longer locked,” Conklin said. He also said small safes shouldn’t be an option either since they can be easily taken out of vehicles.

Jerome has been released after posting a $1,000 bond."

Text of the new law.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, secure your guns or you won't have any guns to worry about anymore. I support this law and would like it to be a Federal regulation. It's one of the few gun control policies I support because it can actually improve safety and doesn't undermine the RKBA.

Queue the hate, it changes nothing.
Click to expand...

No hate involved but I don't agree.

As an advocate of individuals having ALL rights restored when someone has completed time for any crime they may have been convicted of, I can hardly agree with an individual who hasn't even been convicted of a crime suffer any "taking of property."

Hell, I don't agree with any requirement to have a permit.

All this does is serve as a warning to other gun owners NOT to report a lost or stolen weapon.
 
Captain Adverse said:
No hate involved but I don't agree.

As an advocate of individuals having ALL rights restored when someone has completed time for any crime they may have been convicted of, I can hardly agree with an individual who hasn't even been convicted of a crime suffer any "taking of property."

Hell, I don't agree with any requirement to have a permit.

All this does is serve as a warning to other gun owners NOT to report a lost or stolen weapon.
Click to expand...

exactly. Its a stupid law
 
Wayne Jr said:
Man Reports His Pistol Stolen — So Police Take Away All His Guns and License to Carry
By Pluralist | Oct 4, 2019

"A Connecticut man had his pistol permit and firearms seized by authorities after he reported the theft of one of his guns on Monday. Officers responded on Tuesday to a report of car burglary made by Christopher Jerome, 26, the New Haven Register reported. He told police that, believing he would get back into the vehicle shortly, he didn’t lock his car doors after parking on Monday evening. Jerome said the next day he discovered his pistol had been lifted from the car’s unlocked glove box and the driver’s side door was open.

Police arrested Jerome on a reckless endangerment charge.

Under a recently implemented state law, police then entered Jerome’s home and removed the rest of his firearms: a Glock, another handgun and an AR-15.

The new law, which took effect on Oct. 1, prohibits storing a handgun in an unattended motor vehicle if it is not in the trunk, a locked safe or a locked glove box. Authorities also seized his pistol permit, which according to one police official, will likely be revoked. Capt. Richard Conklin told The Register the state believes storing a firearm in a car – even a locked car – is not “a prudent thing to do.” “A car is like a glass box. If you take out any of the windows, it is no longer locked,” Conklin said. He also said small safes shouldn’t be an option either since they can be easily taken out of vehicles.

Jerome has been released after posting a $1,000 bond."

Text of the new law.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, secure your guns or you won't have any guns to worry about anymore. I support this law and would like it to be a Federal regulation. It's one of the few gun control policies I support because it can actually improve safety and doesn't undermine the RKBA.

Queue the hate, it changes nothing.
Click to expand...

His crime appears to have been honestly reporting the theft of a gun to police - omit that (foolish?) self-incrimination and he would have been able to keep his guns and move out of that crazy state. Let this be a lesson to all gun owners in CT.
 
PoS said:
Yup, its like having your driver's license revoked by the authorities if your car got stolen.
Click to expand...

Yep, plus having any other vehicles taken away for such obvious negligence as letting your car get stolen.
 
Captain Adverse said:
All this does is serve as a warning to other gun owners NOT to report a lost or stolen weapon.
Click to expand...

In CT you have 72 hours to report a gun lost or stolen.
 
PoS said:
Yup, its like having your driver's license revoked by the authorities if your car got stolen.
Click to expand...

It's not because his gun was stolen, it's because he didn't lock it up. If his car was locked then he would have been fine, legally.
 
Wayne Jr said:
In CT you have 72 hours to report a gun lost or stolen.
Click to expand...

And how would they know? Are all guns registered there?

If so, I'm glad I don't live there. Sounds like the poster child for opposing "reasonable gun control." :coffeepap:
 
Wayne Jr said:
Man Reports His Pistol Stolen — So Police Take Away All His Guns and License to Carry
By Pluralist | Oct 4, 2019

"A Connecticut man had his pistol permit and firearms seized by authorities after he reported the theft of one of his guns on Monday. Officers responded on Tuesday to a report of car burglary made by Christopher Jerome, 26, the New Haven Register reported. He told police that, believing he would get back into the vehicle shortly, he didn’t lock his car doors after parking on Monday evening. Jerome said the next day he discovered his pistol had been lifted from the car’s unlocked glove box and the driver’s side door was open.

Police arrested Jerome on a reckless endangerment charge.

Under a recently implemented state law, police then entered Jerome’s home and removed the rest of his firearms: a Glock, another handgun and an AR-15.

The new law, which took effect on Oct. 1, prohibits storing a handgun in an unattended motor vehicle if it is not in the trunk, a locked safe or a locked glove box. Authorities also seized his pistol permit, which according to one police official, will likely be revoked. Capt. Richard Conklin told The Register the state believes storing a firearm in a car – even a locked car – is not “a prudent thing to do.” “A car is like a glass box. If you take out any of the windows, it is no longer locked,” Conklin said. He also said small safes shouldn’t be an option either since they can be easily taken out of vehicles.

Jerome has been released after posting a $1,000 bond."

Text of the new law.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, secure your guns or you won't have any guns to worry about anymore. I support this law and would like it to be a Federal regulation. It's one of the few gun control policies I support because it can actually improve safety and doesn't undermine the RKBA.

Queue the hate, it changes nothing.
Click to expand...

he broke the law of that state so he has to face the consequences, i however DEFINITELY do not support the law because its highly illogical, stupid and it goes way to far and violates other rights because of basic reality. I would also never support it in my state and definitely not nationally.

I do agree you shouldnt leave a gun in a unlocked car
I do agree you shouldnt leave a gun in open view in a locked car

i have no issue with a gun being in a locked car out of site and i think its pure retardation to say a gun in a locked car and also in a safe is not prudent.
 
PoS said:
Yup, its like having your driver's license revoked by the authorities if your car got stolen.
Click to expand...

the punishment for mere inadvertence is far worse than many felonies. CT is in need of a colonoscopy by the federal courts. The people who pass these laws are assholes.
 
TurtleDude said:
you're a fan of that too?
Click to expand...
No, but if gun owners keep leaving their guns in unlocked vehicles, we may have to do it anyway. We wouldn't need any laws of any kind at all if people would just police themselves.
 
Wayne Jr said:
No, but if gun owners keep leaving their guns in unlocked vehicles, we may have to do it anyway. We wouldn't need any laws of any kind at all if people would just police themselves.
Click to expand...

I am trying to figure out your obsession with this issue. It doesn't make much sense. The criminal is the person who stole the gun
 
Were the three guns seized at the gunowner's home not secured properly. If they were properly secured then they should not have been seized. If they were not properly secured then they should be seized according to the CT law.

A more sensible solution would be to permantly seize the unsecured gun from the unlocked car, if it is ever found but to hold in escrow the guns seized at home until the gunowner can prove to authorities or a qualified third party like a registered gun club that he has the means, the knowledge, and the self-discipline to properly secure his firearms at all times. When his fines are paid as per the law and he has demonstrated he can be a responsible gunowner, then the guns from the home and his permit should be returned.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
TurtleDude said:
I am trying to figure out your obsession with this issue.
Click to expand...
The Army taught me the need to keep sensitive items secure. People who don't, are punished.

TurtleDude said:
It doesn't make much sense. The criminal is the person who stole the gun
Click to expand...
The gun owner was the first criminal by failing to secure his gun. Then another criminal came and stole the gun. There is no good guy here, only bad guys.
 
Evilroddy said:
Were the three guns seized at the gunowner's home not secured properly. If they were properly secured then they should not have been seized. If they were not properly secured then they should be seized according to the CT law.

A more sensible solution would be to permantly seize the unsecured gun from the unlocked car, if it is ever found but to hold in escrow the guns seized at home until the gunowner can prove to authorities or a qualified third party like a registered gun club that he has the means, the knowledge, and the self-discipline to properly secure his firearms at all times. When his fines are paid as per the law and he has demonstrated he can be a responsible gunowner, then the guns from the home and his permit should be returned.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

"the crime" was not sufficient to strip the man of his constitutional rights. Hopefully, he will file a 42 USC 1983 constitutional rights deprivation action and get it in front of a Trump judge, and that judge will hit CT with several million dollars in punitive damages. that is what needs to happen to the idiots who run these states
 
Wayne Jr said:
The Army taught me the need to keep sensitive items secure. People who don't, are punished.


The gun owner was the first criminal by failing to secure his gun. Then another criminal came and stole the gun. There is no good guy here, only bad guys.
Click to expand...

That is not a proper crime. It is akin to blaming a woman for her rape by how she is dressed and where she is walking,
 
TurtleDude said:
That is not a proper crime.
Click to expand...
Creating a public hazard is a 'proper crime'.

TurtleDude said:
It is akin to blaming a woman for her rape by how she is dressed and where she is walking,
Click to expand...
Unsecured storage =/= style of dress. No one's saying the former gun owner is in the wrong because his car was painted provocatively or he drove it to the wrong club. It's not the same thing at all.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Creating a public hazard is a 'proper crime'.


Unsecured storage =/= style of dress.
Click to expand...

putting a gun in a car and not in plain sight is hardly creating a public hazard.
 
TurtleDude said:
putting a gun in a car and not in plain sight is hardly creating a public hazard.
Click to expand...
Failing to secure it is a public hazard. He left his car unlocked. All he had to do was lock his car. Then, even if the gun was still stolen, he wouldn't be in legal trouble. Most of these crimes are 'crimes of opportunity' and a car simply being locked can deter the incident. The perp will usually just move on and find an easier target.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Failing to secure it is a public hazard. He left his car unlocked. All he had to do was lock his car. Then, even if the gun was still stolen, he wouldn't be in legal trouble. Most of these crimes are 'crimes of opportunity' and a car simply being locked can deter the incident. The perp will usually just move on and find an easier target.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It wasn't obvious. I suspect next thing you will demand is jailing people when a mope picks the lock or forces open their trunk. He was the victim of a crime
 
TurtleDude said:
"the crime" was not sufficient to strip the man of his constitutional rights. Hopefully, he will file a 42 USC 1983 constitutional rights deprivation action and get it in front of a Trump judge, and that judge will hit CT with several million dollars in punitive damages. that is what needs to happen to the idiots who run these states
Click to expand...

TurtleDude:

Two points:

1) With rights come responsibilities. This gentleman did not live up to the basic responsibilities for gun ownership. He deserves to be keel hauled for such stupidity but he also has the right you cite. That right should be suspended by a court order until the gunowner can demonstrate the requisite responsibility to enjoy that right once again. When he can, then his right should be reinstated without further prejudice. There are no absolute rights in this world and all rights come with equally sacred responsibilities.

2) A "Trump judge"? Gee, I'm glad to see that the US Judiciary has not been politicised and is not beholden to any person, party or entity other than the rule of law.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Evilroddy said:
TurtleDude:

Two points:

1) With rights come responsibilities. This gentleman did not live up to the basic responsibilities for gun ownership. He deserves to be keel hauled for such stupidity but he also has the right you cite. That right should be suspended by a court order until the gunowner can demonstrate the requisite responsibility to enjoy that right. When he can, his right should be reinstated. There are no absolute rights and all rights come with responsibilities.

2) A "Trump judge". Gee, I'm glad to see that the US Judiciary has not been politicised and is not beholden to any person, party or entity other than the rule of law.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

I reject your concept of his basic responsibilities


I hope that anti gun politicians are ruined financially for violating the constitutional rights of citizens. I'd prefer jail sentences of hard labor, followed by a permanent debarment from ever holding public office but I doubt that can be implemented. SO I will settle for the politicians and their state being sued jointly and severally for constitutional tort violations and that the verdicts be sufficiently vast to completely serve as a deterrent for other clowns in office from doing the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom